Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

    Originally posted by Trophy View Post
    I agree.

    He needs to have the ball in his hands more. He's the biggest offensive spark off the bench. He's good off the dribble, he can create, and I feel like Vogel needs to draw up some more plays getting him the ball or have him drive to the hoop for a foul more.

    I think having Augustin, who's been a black hole offensively, has kept he and the bench back a bit. There's been little offensive movement. Which is why changing it up a little and getting the ball in Green's hands might add a spark to the bench that hasn't been there on a nightly basis.
    I wouldn't expect Green having to create his own shot off the dribble to end well too often. He's best in one or two dribble type situations, more and you're asking for trouble.

    New Jersey ran two plays for him last year consistently that stand out as the type of things he needs to be involved in more often. One involved the PF or C at the elbow handing the ball off to Green on a rub off screen. Depending on how his defender and the PF defender reacted, Green would either pull up for a 15 to 20 footer, or take a one to two dribble drive to the hoop. The play worked pretty well for a team that was having trouble finding offense (much like this one), and was mostly run with Humphries and Green. I don't see any reason that it wouldn't work with West and Green. If you go to the 1:50 mark in the below video you can see the same play being run with Williams and Green. Further from the basket than normal, but same concept applies.



    Other than that, New Jersey ran a lot of isolation post ups for Green, and he did really well in those. Why those two things aren't in the Pacer playbook and being run for Green consistently is beyond me. It shouldn't take a genius to look at how effective he was last year with the Nets and try to recapture that by running similar plays for him. I'd get it if this team was full of offensive options and running plays specifically for Green didn't make sense, but that obviously isn't the case here.

    Still, the thing that might bother me most is the Pacers signed one of the most exciting transition players in the league, and never get out in transition. Bleh.

    A Gerald Green fan who now finds himself rooting for the Suns.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

      DJ played better, but still not good. The other players don't move when he has the ball, and he does nothing to get them to move. They run that PnR, he drives over to the wing to create space for the picker, and that's about it. Too much standing around, too much dribbling.


      Starters played well for the most part. Needed another player or two to have an impact to have a real shot at pulling that one out. Just not enough dependable play from the bench.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

        If you're a weak side wing watching your PG and a big run a pick and roll, where should you be cutting or moving to?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

          They just don't have the offense clicking totally yet. It's improved lately, but still not where they need to be
          Smothered Chicken!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

            Originally posted by repole View Post
            I wouldn't expect Green having to create his own shot off the dribble to end well too often. He's best in one or two dribble type situations, more and you're asking for trouble.

            New Jersey ran two plays for him last year consistently that stand out as the type of things he needs to be involved in more often. One involved the PF or C at the elbow handing the ball off to Green on a rub off screen. Depending on how his defender and the PF defender reacted, Green would either pull up for a 15 to 20 footer, or take a one to two dribble drive to the hoop. The play worked pretty well for a team that was having trouble finding offense (much like this one), and was mostly run with Humphries and Green. I don't see any reason that it wouldn't work with West and Green. If you go to the 1:50 mark in the below video you can see the same play being run with Williams and Green. Further from the basket than normal, but same concept applies.



            Other than that, New Jersey ran a lot of isolation post ups for Green, and he did really well in those. Why those two things aren't in the Pacer playbook and being run for Green consistently is beyond me. It shouldn't take a genius to look at how effective he was last year with the Nets and try to recapture that by running similar plays for him. I'd get it if this team was full of offensive options and running plays specifically for Green didn't make sense, but that obviously isn't the case here.

            Still, the thing that might bother me most is the Pacers signed one of the most exciting transition players in the league, and never get out in transition. Bleh.
            Appreciate this post. I'm not anti - green. I just don't see that he's done a whole lot of worth given what I think we need out of him. Your post brings into question if he's being used to his strengths.

            I agree with you - and you've seen him more than me - that he's not a creator with the dribble. Totally agree that he can operate off a dribble move of up to roughly two dribbles. Honestly, as recently as last year, I think that's a good description of DG as well.

            Anyway, there's what Gerald is capable of. There's what the coaching staff is trying to do with him. And there's whether the braintrust's evaluation of his talent was accurate given what we need, which is a dynamic scoring option off the bench. I would like to see our approach play more to his strengths. At the same time, I think we banked on him being the level / type of player we needed off the bench. Personally, I think they misjudged either our needs and / or his ceiling given those needs.
            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

            -Emiliano Zapata

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

              Stephenson should have been in there. I'm not sure Frank appreciates what he does for our other players when he's on the court. When Lance is playing well, 23 minutes isn't enough. It would have been nice having him in when we were scoring 2 in the last 5 minutes.

              With that said, Green did played well. I'd like to see him get some (if not most) of Young's minutes. I haven't been impressed with his game recently at all. I'm starting to think he's as dumb a player as Green without the talent. His defense has fallen off recently and without that he's pretty much useless.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

                Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                Appreciate this post. I'm not anti - green. I just don't see that he's done a whole lot of worth given what I think we need out of him. Your post brings into question if he's being used to his strengths.

                I agree with you - and you've seen him more than me - that he's not a creator with the dribble. Totally agree that he can operate off a dribble move of up to roughly two dribbles. Honestly, as recently as last year, I think that's a good description of DG as well.

                Anyway, there's what Gerald is capable of. There's what the coaching staff is trying to do with him. And there's whether the braintrust's evaluation of his talent was accurate given what we need, which is a dynamic scoring option off the bench. I would like to see our approach play more to his strengths. At the same time, I think we banked on him being the level / type of player we needed off the bench. Personally, I think they misjudged either our needs and / or his ceiling given those needs.
                I can more than understand anyone's hesitation/doubt/concern with Green. As big of a Green fan as I am, I'm well aware of his flaws, and there are a lot of them. In terms of whether the front office evaluated him poorly, I'm not sure. I think 3 years was probably too long for a guy who was coming off his first successful 700 minutes of NBA basketball. There is/was a lot of reason to believe that his jumpshot had made marked improvement since his time earlier in the league. Most people only see the 700 minutes with the Nets, but his shooting stroke in the DLeague was impressive to say the least. I know it's the DLeague, but 60/131 from 3 (46%) is impressive against pretty much any competition. His continued hot shooting with the Nets seemed to validate that the shooting touch he showed in the DLeague wasn't a fluke.

                So you can look at him one of a few ways:
                a. He's a quality shooter who's currently in a cold streak. He's probably not quite as good of a shooter as he showed last year, but 43-45% from the field and 36-40% from 3 should be expected in the right situation.
                b. Last season was a mirage, he's not a good shooter. He's not as bad as we've seen so far, but expecting more than 40-42% from the field and 33-35% from 3 is probably a mistake.


                If I'd never seen Green play before (or only in passing), I'd probably choose B. His jumper has looked pretty awful since preseason, and as a stats guy, his sample size last year isn't nearly big enough to convince someone that it was anything more than some variance. But I've obviously seen a lot of Green, probably more than just about anyone, and for me it's pretty easy to spot what's going wrong with him the majority of the time. In this case, I think most of it boils down to a lack of confidence and the way he's being used, the latter problem compounding the former. I think the best thing Vogel could do is run a few plays designed to get Green easy baskets or to the free throw line. If Green doesn't have full confidence in his jumper, get him involved other ways, and that confidence is more likely to return than if he keeps spotting up without success. It's like diversifying your investments, if one stock takes a dip your whole portfolio isn't screwed. Green's poor jumpshooting wouldn't be nearly as noticeable if he was being used to do anything other than spot up offensively.


                I'd like to tell you that everything's going to be fine in Pacerland with Green. I can assure you he'll hit a hot shooting streak at some point offensively that will make everything seem ok again, and you'll wonder how he could have ever looked this bad. But as long as he's used as nothing more than a spot up shooter, he's going to be prone to these cold stretches. The worst part might be that his confidence has a far bigger impact on the rest of his game than it should. When he's scoring/shooting well there's an extra bounce in his step defensively, on the glass, he just looks like a different guy than the one Pacer fans have seen so far.

                A Gerald Green fan who now finds himself rooting for the Suns.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Pacers/OKC POSTGAME THREAD

                  Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                  I hope this is a break out game of sorts for Green where he starts playing more like sixth man material, and less like the 8th or 9th. Overall he has been shooting better this month (.458) so far, but it is still too early to call it a trend.
                  I hope that we see Green posting up more. I know that he can do it. Time to use him to his strengths.

                  That's not ball handling. That's posting up.
                  Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
                  Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

                  Panopticon

                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X